Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie Black R/T
 LOL
Just for the record Im all for well managed fisheries....if that means C&R, tags, slot, minimum size as it is now, then so be it.
I dont think the answer is the open everything up to retention to spread out pressure either...but i do think we can do better and people showing interest in the methods employed whether, for or against, is a good thing.
What about a slot on lakes already open to retention? Slave for example....we havent cleaned the lake out of spawners yet at 1 over 43cm....imagine if people stopped eating the few 5 or 6 pounders caught out of there and let those big girls acutally drop their eggs. I know, I know....the fish would all get kept before they spawn....but would they? how do we know? surely this has been tried in other jurisdictions with similar angling pressure?
Ive asked the question several times to bios, Co's and easy to irritate old guys with 100,000 dollar tournament boats...and nobody can give an example of a failed attempt at slot retention in Alberta....but every single one of them is 100% "sure" it wouldnt work.
They may be right. But what if they're wrong? |
With slot limits under spawning age/size. You risk the fishery. Slot limits should be monitored closely. Need way more money to do it yearly. Now they are at about every 5 years. By then easy collapse.
There are other ways to do things but under the circumstances This appears to be the best. Fish have to spawn at least once and possibly 2 or even 3 times before getting to minimum harvest size.
Edit: Tags are a way to monitor/regulate the slot, just another management tool.